Is this what we want leading our country?

[Maia Gabrial]

How does this woman get away with crap like this?

And why don't all those people involved in this deception not feel some guilt for participating in it? The money must have been good.

Did they honestly think that no one was paying close attention?

Here's the video and see what you think:

nCP3HIhQgLI

I guess we're not the only ones being dumbed down, huh....? :becky:

[Yetti]

i will no vote for hitlery or trumpster ever,.. 3rd option the only option

[A Voice from the Mountains]

Voting 3rd party is like playing Russian roulette with the other two, maybe literally if Hillary gets in and starts WW3.

[bluestflame]

BgXOUHuHCtM we know the tech is real , they just forgot to look at the bigger picture ( pardon the pun) lucky someone else did

[Yetti]

Ok bsbray, we" must break the 2 party system ,, no one else will do it for us. We need to stop votig for the less evil of the 2 cabal candidates. Or our chances of survival diminishes exponentially every 4 years.. To vote one of the 2 options on the controlled media is, to play russian roulette with 6 bullets in the drum.

[DeDukshyn]

The entire crowd / foreground has been added in - it is composed. Nothing too new and it's not super high tech. The foreground elements is "stock" footage that was captured against a green screen - it looks like the phone "footage" was added (easy to do if everyone is videoing a green screen). Then the "real" event is videoed and a composite is made - likely this was done in near real-time as well -- that explains why the footage on the phones can't match the actual background footage - that aspect would have to be set up before the actual event happened - therefore a match between the peoples phones and background would be impossible.

The motivation for doing this? To make it look like Hillary has an army of strong supporters and that she is of celebrity status (when in actuality she is likely in a near empty room)-- that is why everyone in the crowd needs to video her :) lol.

[joeecho]

Whom ever wins the election says more about which direction the PTB wants to direct the course of the US on the world stage then it does about the supposed person that wins.

[LivioRazlo]

i will no vote for hitlery or trumpster ever,.. 3rd option the only option

Trumpster? Haha. The ignorance is real in America and I'm not sure what scares me more: someone who can't grasp reality or war under a POTUS Clinton.

Not voting for Trump or voting 3rd party is effectively the same as giving your vote to Clinton.

This is not the year to be playing games.

You're either for the continuation of America as a country, or you're not. It's really that simple.

[joeecho]

What if the bulk of the population did not vote at all. Now that would be interesting to see.

[TargeT]

What if the bulk of the population did not vote at all. Now that would be interesting to see.

that would be the best outcome i can think of...

a 2% voter turn out would be a VICTORY imo..

[A Voice from the Mountains]

Ok bsbray, we" must break the 2 party system ,, no one else will do it for us. We need to stop votig for the less evil of the 2 cabal candidates. Or our chances of survival diminishes exponentially every 4 years.. To vote one of the 2 options on the controlled media is, to play russian roulette with 6 bullets in the drum.

First of all you should look at countries that employ lots of different parties and see that, guess what! They still have enormous corruption and this is not a magic pill to solve that. If anything it makes things more difficult to manage. The problem is one of accountability and corruption, not how spread out you make the political rainbow.

Second of all, even if you are still hellbent on destroying the 2-party system as the ultimate evil, this is a pitiful time to try it by potentially throwing the election to Hillary. Most people who say they'll vote 3rd party (mostly to Gary Johnson, who leads handily over Jill Stein) would rather vote for Trump in a 2:1 ratio over Hillary in a 2-way match up. Instead of getting a fairer system you will just result in a 3rd term of Obama or, as I suspect, something even worse.

[DeDukshyn]

Ok bsbray, we" must break the 2 party system ,, no one else will do it for us. We need to stop votig for the less evil of the 2 cabal candidates. Or our chances of survival diminishes exponentially every 4 years.. To vote one of the 2 options on the controlled media is, to play russian roulette with 6 bullets in the drum.

First of all you should look at countries that employ lots of different parties and see that, guess what! They still have enormous corruption and this is not a magic pill to solve that. If anything it makes things more difficult to manage. The problem is one of accountability and corruption, not how spread out you make the political rainbow.

Second of all, even if you are still hellbent on destroying the 2-party system as the ultimate evil, this is a pitiful time to try it by potentially throwing the election to Hillary. Most people who say they'll vote 3rd party (mostly to Gary Johnson, who leads handily over Jill Stein) would rather vote for Trump in a 2:1 ratio over Hillary in a 2-way match up. Instead of getting a fairer system you will just result in a 3rd term of Obama or, as I suspect, something even worse.

While I don't disagree with what you are saying, you may be missing a bit of the point. The problem isn't a "two party system" -- the problem is this specific two party system which is actually only one single system, that is crafted in such a way that it is impossible for anyone not under the umbrella of that single point of control, to participate.

The problem isn't that a two party democratic system doesn't work, the problem is first, that there is no two party democratic system in US. There is no real democracy at all -- it is faked. This is a far greater evil than having a real democracy, to which any "many party" proper democratic system might be using, regardless of some participating parties are corrupt.

One also has to be careful of the word "corruption" - lefties always call the right corrupt and vice versa - as tactics in politics, whether true or not.

The real problem is in both scenarios (US "two party system", and real democracy that has corrupt parties is foremost a lack of full transparency of the underpinnings of process and true history past actions / decision of the people being elected.

[A Voice from the Mountains]

While I don't disagree with what you are saying, you may be missing a bit of the point. The problem isn't a "two party system" -- the problem is this specific two party system which is actually only one single system, that is crafted in such a way that it is impossible for anyone not under the umbrella of that single point of control, to participate.

This may have been the case when the neo-cons controlled the RNC (ie the Bushes and their friends), but I don't think this is the case now with Trump's faction having forcefully taken over the GOP. Even the Bushes have been backing Clinton now.

As if to drive the point further home, Clinton is continuing to push globalist agendas while Trump's campaign has been preaching nationalism. The two agendas are not compatible. When Bush heading the RNC, the neo-cons were just as globalist as the leftists still are.

Also historically the 2-party system has not always been run by the same people. The two parties, whatever they happen to have been (and there have even been periods of 3 parties, 4 candidates, etc.) have often been very antagonistic to each other in real terms.


The problem isn't that a two party democratic system doesn't work, the problem is first, that there is no two party democratic system in US. There is no real democracy at all -- it is faked. This is a far greater evil than having a real democracy, to which any "many party" proper democratic system might be using, regardless of some participating parties are corrupt.

By this argument it makes absolutely no difference if we have a 2-party system or not. The real focus should be on combatting voter fraud in its many different forms. That is the immediate danger to us this election cycle just as it was in the last 4 elections, which were all rigged from what I've seen.

Trump has been saying that the system is "rigged" and drawing attention to voter fraud issues. That's going to have to be ramped up approaching November, or we need some other way of putting pressure on the riggers to back off.

[DeDukshyn]

While I don't disagree with what you are saying, you may be missing a bit of the point. The problem isn't a "two party system" -- the problem is this specific two party system which is actually only one single system, that is crafted in such a way that it is impossible for anyone not under the umbrella of that single point of control, to participate.

This may have been the case when the neo-cons controlled the RNC (ie the Bushes and their friends), but I don't think this is the case now with Trump's faction having forcefully taken over the GOP. Even the Bushes have been backing Clinton now.

As if to drive the point further home, Clinton is continuing to push globalist agendas while Trump's campaign has been preaching nationalism. The two agendas are not compatible. When Bush heading the RNC, the neo-cons were just as globalist as the leftists still are.

Don't be too sure ... there is the argument that Trump is running or allowed to run in an attempt to give Hillary more credit, with "them" assuming that Trump's dangerous insanity will be seen as the the greater of two evils.




Also historically the 2-party system has not always been run by the same people. The two parties, whatever they happen to have been (and there have even been periods of 3 parties, 4 candidates, etc.) have often been very antagonistic to each other in real terms.

Consider hierarchies -- some of the people below the top are paving the road to hell with good intentions, so to speak. :)



The problem isn't that a two party democratic system doesn't work, the problem is first, that there is no two party democratic system in US. There is no real democracy at all -- it is faked. This is a far greater evil than having a real democracy, to which any "many party" proper democratic system might be using, regardless of some participating parties are corrupt.

By this argument it makes absolutely no difference if we have a 2-party system or not. The real focus should be on combatting voter fraud in its many different forms. That is the immediate danger to us this election cycle just as it was in the last 4 elections, which were all rigged from what I've seen.


My point is that it makes little difference on that front, and yes, we should be combating the lower level issues - as opening these up will reveal much of that which remains hidden from public mass knowledge on higher levels.

[Sueanne47]

I posted on the other thread 'the devil & donald trump' that news just broke out Mr trump has done a u turn on russia, saying putin doesnt respect US leaders & broke syria deal.

He is not to be trusted any more than killary

Nathaniel is very good at putting things into perspective and who's pulling the strings:

eVHIJnXUGRs

Lets face it ~ none of us western people have the power to do anything about our neocon governments...we just have to sit it out and hope for the best, and pray to God that we get through these tough times alive. :heart:

[A Voice from the Mountains]

This may have been the case when the neo-cons controlled the RNC (ie the Bushes and their friends), but I don't think this is the case now with Trump's faction having forcefully taken over the GOP. Even the Bushes have been backing Clinton now.

As if to drive the point further home, Clinton is continuing to push globalist agendas while Trump's campaign has been preaching nationalism. The two agendas are not compatible. When Bush heading the RNC, the neo-cons were just as globalist as the leftists still are.

Don't be too sure ... there is the argument that Trump is running or allowed to run in an attempt to give Hillary more credit, with "them" assuming that Trump's dangerous insanity will be seen as the the greater of two evils.

This argument makes absolutely no sense to me because they have already let several anti-globalist "genies" out of the bottle that will not be easily placed back in, even if Trump loses. One of those is severe criticism against free trade deals like NAFTA and TPP. Another is the illegal immigration issue, which has also been placed front and center for a change. Pay-for-play has been exposed in the DNC, among numerous other scandals that could land DNC members and Hillary and her staff in prison if ever pursued in court.

None of that looks like a charade to me, just like Pentagon-backed forces fighting CIA-backed forces in Syria doesn't look like a charade either. It would be retarded to stage something that is actually severely damaging to your agenda, just to further your agenda. It does not compute. If this was all staged they could have done it much more gently to their precious globalist agendas.

Plus Trump only looks like the "greater of two evils" if you watch liberal MSM or read liberal commentary online all day. Unless someone is thoroughly brainwashed I can't see how they could possibly imagine Hillary to be the lesser evil. She's the only one running who has actually committed crimes, with the public having the direct evidence of it in public domain thanks to hackers, and yet nothing is being done about it.





Also historically the 2-party system has not always been run by the same people. The two parties, whatever they happen to have been (and there have even been periods of 3 parties, 4 candidates, etc.) have often been very antagonistic to each other in real terms.

Consider hierarchies -- some of the people below the top are paving the road to hell with good intentions, so to speak. :)

That's a theory that assumes some monolithic conspiracy that has absolute control over an entire nation's politics. As much as I enjoy a good conspiracy theory, I have come to believe that imagining some monolithic control structure that is over everything is just another woo-woo idea from the alternative community, just like Blue Avians and all the stuff that Simon Parkes says.

I think it's closer to the truth to say that we are run by a lot of psychopaths and sociopaths who have risen to the tops of our societies because of their ruthless and cut-throat ways of doing things. When you have a big group of psychopaths together, they don't suddenly stop being psychopaths. They will even fight each other for power and there will be backstabbing and betrayals and realignments. And thrown into the mix, I believe, are a few people who are genuinely trying to act for the benefit of all. Not to mention we could all stand together and force a change at any moment, if we could organize ourselves well enough.

There is also plenty of evidence of high-ranking banking executives being "suicided," political leaders and whole governments being overthrown because they're being antagonistic to various foreign powers, and all sorts of other intrigues that indicate that we're not just under some monolithic control structure that has absolute power. That's why I think assuming that there must be some monolithic conspiracy is as woo-woo as assuming that Corey Goode's stories must be true. And it's totally disempowering.

[GrnEggsNHam]

What if the bulk of the population did not vote at all. Now that would be interesting to see.

that would be the best outcome i can think of...

a 2% voter turn out would be a VICTORY imo..

This is what I've been preaching to anyone who asks me who I am voting for.

[wondering]

Can someone clarify for me what not voting would accomplish? Other than a "statement", what would be changed or gained?

[TargeT]

Can someone clarify for me what not voting would accomplish? Other than a "statement", what would be changed or gained?

That, and showing solidarity with others in a peaceful yet visible way.

Kinda sad right? Best tactic I can currently think of however.